MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949962288 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0908.4362

Efficient magnetohydrodynamic simulations on graphics processing units with CUDA

2009· preprint· en· W2949962288 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hon‐Cheng Wong, Un‐Hong Wong, Xueshang Feng, Zesheng Tang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsCUDAComputational scienceComputer scienceMagnetohydrodynamicsParallel computingGraphicsGraphics processing unitMagnetohydrodynamic driveGeneral-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsDouble-precision floating-point formatComputationComputer graphics (images)PhysicsAlgorithmPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulations based on the ideal MHD equations have become a powerful tool for modeling phenomena in a wide range of applications including laboratory, astrophysical, and space plasmas. In general, high-resolution methods for solving the ideal MHD equations are computationally expensive and Beowulf clusters or even supercomputers are often used to run the codes that implemented these methods. With the advent of the Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA), modern graphics processing units (GPUs) provide an alternative approach to parallel computing for scientific simulations. In this paper we present, to the author's knowledge, the first implementation of MHD simulations entirely on GPUs with CUDA, named GPU-MHD, to accelerate the simulation process. GPU-MHD supports both single and double precision computation. A series of numerical tests have been performed to validate the correctness of our code. Accuracy evaluation by comparing single and double precision computation results is also given. Performance measurements of both single and double precision are conducted on both the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 (GT200 architecture) and GTX 480 (Fermi architecture) graphics cards. These measurements show that our GPU-based implementation achieves between one and two orders of magnitude depending on the used graphics card, problem size, and precision when comparing to the original serial CPU MHD implementation. In addition, we extend GPU-MHD to support the visualization of the simulation results and thus the whole MHD simulation and visualization process can be performed entirely on GPUs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.137 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207